|
Post by ADH45258 on Apr 19, 2019 19:06:55 GMT
I agree with combined the 218 and 306 but I think the reason they won’t is because the residential streets in the West Acton area prevent double deckers from going down those roads. I agree the 440 shouldn’t be tampered with in Acton, the route is fine as it is. When I went to a meeting about buses in Chiswick, the residents were attacking Geoff Hobbs about their loss of a link to Park Royal ASDA and Central Middlesex Hospital. They were also angry that they wouldn’t see the fruits of the Wembley extension and felt that was TFL trying to conceal they negative effects of the route extension. One resident one Bollo Lane was furious about the 440 no longer going over the level crossing. Whilst I think the 440 going over the level crossing would hamper the reliability of the route, no one wants to go to the Business Park. I think the only reason the 440 was sent into the Business Park is because of the route at least goes through the Business Park it is less of a waste. Having two Acton - Chiswick Business Park routes seems utterly pointless but for the 440 I don’t see what else one could do if you don’t want the route going over the level crossing. I think that the 218/306 combo should go up horn lane to North Acton not via the 440. I think that it’s a stupid idea replacing a single deck route to replace the 266. I’ve always seen 266s bursting when they leave Hammersmith. I have seen double decks in West Acton so I don’t think that West Acton is a problem. I’ve seen the 207 and 266 diverted via West Acton and rail replacement also goes via West Acton. But I think the residents might have a problem with double deckers. It would make a lot more sense to just extend the proposed 306 to North Acton, with the 218 not being introduced.
|
|
|
Post by secretbu5dude on Apr 28, 2019 9:46:42 GMT
Double decks have gone along the West Acton section of 440 before (in the form of tube replacement) so sending the 306 that way wouldn't be a bad idea 🤔
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Apr 28, 2019 18:21:12 GMT
I think it would make sense to have an overlapping section between the 266 and 218. Instead of sending the 218 via West Acton, why not have the 218 following the existing 266 routeing to North Acton. The 218 could be extended to Wembley, that way Acton still gets its link to Wembley and a new Hammersmith-Wembley link is created, the 218 should use double deckers. This way there is no need to meddle with the 440 in Acton, the route provides well used links between Park Royal ASDA/Central Middlesex Hospital and Acton (I know numerous people in West Acton who are angry about the 440 changes). The 391 shortening doesn't need to happen and a double decker 218 alleviates the need for the 306 to be introduced. The 440 extension to Wembley then doesn't need to happen because the 218 covers the link and two Stonebridge Park-Acton routes is excessive
218 Hammersmith-Wembley via Horn Lane 266 Acton-Brent Cross 440 withdrawn between Central Middlesex Hospital and Stonebridge Park
The 440 in Chiswick is tricky. On the one hand its not ideal to have that level crossing down so often but on the other hand the demand for connections to Chiswick Business Park is minute. Geoff Hobbs said the 440 change links the Business Park to Crossrail, one woman replied and quite rightly said 'what makes you think someone who wants to go to Chiswick Business Park would bother getting off at Acton Mainline where there will only four trains an hour and get a bus to the Business Park when they could get off at Ealing Broadway where there are eight trains an hour and get on the District Line to Chiswick Park? You would probably get to the Business Park quicker by doing the latter.' I think the 70 alone is enough for CBP, there certainly was scope to pull the 27 out of the Business Park. In all honesty few people who wawnt to get to Chiswick Business Park use the bus. Having a route which serves residents who will use the bus service provided is better than a route which carries fresh air. I have therefore devised a botched compromise which was the best I could do.
440 changes implemented as TFL did New midibus route connecting Acton and Turnham Green via the former 440 routeing which goes over the level crossing and picks up people on Bollo Lane
This midibus route is relatively short so will be less susceptible to delay and it will mean people on Bollo Lane with reduced mobility are not cut off. I know I am going to get attacked for it but its my answer to residents who need a bus service
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Apr 28, 2019 19:28:56 GMT
I think it would make sense to have an overlapping section between the 266 and 218. Instead of sending the 218 via West Acton, why not have the 218 following the existing 266 routeing to North Acton. The 218 could be extended to Wembley, that way Acton still gets its link to Wembley and a new Hammersmith-Wembley link is created, the 218 should use double deckers. This way there is no need to meddle with the 440 in Acton, the route provides well used links between Park Royal ASDA/Central Middlesex Hospital and Acton (I know numerous people in West Acton who are angry about the 440 changes). The 391 shortening doesn't need to happen and a double decker 218 alleviates the need for the 306 to be introduced. The 440 extension to Wembley then doesn't need to happen because the 218 covers the link and two Stonebridge Park-Acton routes is excessive 218 Hammersmith-Wembley via Horn Lane 266 Acton-Brent Cross 440 withdrawn between Central Middlesex Hospital and Stonebridge Park The 440 in Chiswick is tricky. On the one hand its not ideal to have that level crossing down so often but on the other hand the demand for connections to Chiswick Business Park is minute. Geoff Hobbs said the 440 change links the Business Park to Crossrail, one woman replied and quite rightly said 'what makes you think someone who wants to go to Chiswick Business Park would bother getting off at Acton Mainline where there will only four trains an hour and get a bus to the Business Park when they could get off at Ealing Broadway where there are eight trains an hour and get on the District Line to Chiswick Park? You would probably get to the Business Park quicker by doing the latter.' I think the 70 alone is enough for CBP, there certainly was scope to pull the 27 out of the Business Park. In all honesty few people who wawnt to get to Chiswick Business Park use the bus. Having a route which serves residents who will use the bus service provided is better than a route which carries fresh air. I have therefore devised a botched compromise which was the best I could do. 440 changes implemented as TFL did New midibus route connecting Acton and Turnham Green via the former 440 routeing which goes over the level crossing and picks up people on Bollo Lane This midibus route is relatively short so will be less susceptible to delay and it will mean people on Bollo Lane with reduced mobility are not cut off. I know I am going to get attacked for it but its my answer to residents who need a bus service Good idea about the 218 and 440. But me personally I don't think that the 70 should be going to CBP. I wish that the E10 was going to CBP as originally planned. I wish that the 70 was withdrawn between East Acton and CBP and for the 7 to be rerouted to Ealing Broadway via the 70 to Acton and route 207 to Ealing.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Apr 28, 2019 21:23:37 GMT
440 changes implemented as TFL did New midibus route connecting Acton and Turnham Green via the former 440 routeing which goes over the level crossing and picks up people on Bollo Lane This midibus route is relatively short so will be less susceptible to delay and it will mean people on Bollo Lane with reduced mobility are not cut off. I know I am going to get attacked for it but its my answer to residents who need a bus service Not an attack but the reason why TfL shifted the 440 away from the crossing is because of the planned uplift in North London line services. Now those improvements are somewhat delayed because the rolling stock cascade hasn't been possible yet but when they happen the barriers will be down for a large proportion of every daytime hour. Even a very local minibus will get embroiled in the resultant congestion and is unlikely to be attractive. I do agree that pulling the 440 away from Chiswick Park is not very bright thinking really - so much for modal integration.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on May 3, 2019 19:29:44 GMT
I wonder were in Hayes will the 140 and H32 terminate? I wonder what will be removed from Ruislip to fit in the 278? Why can’t the 278 go to Harrow?
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 3, 2019 23:19:19 GMT
I wonder were in Hayes will the 140 and H32 terminate? I wonder what will be removed from Ruislip to fit in the 278? Why can’t the 278 go to Harrow? Maybe one route will use the U5's old stand whilst the 278 wouldn't fit in at Harrow due to limited space hence why the 223 is proposed to be cut back to allow the X140 to squeeze in. It seems they could easily solve this without breaking links by extending the 395 to Northwick Park Hospital bringing a much direct link from South Harrow who I'm sure would appreciate that sort of link but it boils down to money and cutting the 223 back is the cheaper option.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on May 4, 2019 17:04:34 GMT
I wonder were in Hayes will the 140 and H32 terminate? I wonder what will be removed from Ruislip to fit in the 278? Why can’t the 278 go to Harrow? Maybe one route will use the U5's old stand whilst the 278 wouldn't fit in at Harrow due to limited space hence why the 223 is proposed to be cut back to allow the X140 to squeeze in. It seems they could easily solve this without breaking links by extending the 395 to Northwick Park Hospital bringing a much direct link from South Harrow who I'm sure would appreciate that sort of link but it boils down to money and cutting the 223 back is the cheaper option. I was thinking to make space at Harrow to maybe have the H14 extended from Northwick Park Hospital to Westway Cross, the 395 to Northwick Park and the 278 to Harrow. I wonder if the 223 and 395 could be merged together one route to solve the problem of limited stand space at Harrow. Northolt and South Harrow could do with a link to Wembley.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on May 4, 2019 17:32:23 GMT
I wonder were in Hayes will the 140 and H32 terminate? I wonder what will be removed from Ruislip to fit in the 278? Why can’t the 278 go to Harrow? What would be the reason for the 278 being extended to Harrow? Which route would it take and would anything else need to be curtailed to prevent over-bussing and ensure best use of resources?
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on May 4, 2019 18:01:56 GMT
I wonder were in Hayes will the 140 and H32 terminate? I wonder what will be removed from Ruislip to fit in the 278? Why can’t the 278 go to Harrow? What would be the reason for the 278 being extended to Harrow? Which route would it take and would anything else need to be curtailed to prevent over-bussing and ensure best use of resources? The point of the 278 going to Ruislip is to connect people to Crossrail whilst people on the 140 route don't lose their connection to Hayes and Harlington. I'm sure there will be more traffic congestion in the area with Crossrail which will hamper the 140 hence why its being cut
|
|
|
Post by COBO on May 4, 2019 18:24:16 GMT
I wonder were in Hayes will the 140 and H32 terminate? I wonder what will be removed from Ruislip to fit in the 278? Why can’t the 278 go to Harrow? What would be the reason for the 278 being extended to Harrow? Which route would it take and would anything else need to be curtailed to prevent over-bussing and ensure best use of resources? To link North Harrow, Rayners Lane and Eastote with Hayes and Heathrow. To provide alternate link between Heathrow and Harrow. It could be go via Pembroke Road, North View, Eastern Avenue, Village Way, Village Way East, Imperial Drive, North Harrow Station, Pinner Road and then via route 183 to Harrow. To make room at Harrow I would extend the H14 from Northwick Park Hospital to Westway Cross and extend the 395 to Northwick Park or merge the 395 and 223 together because Northolt and South Harrow could do with a link with Wembley.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on May 4, 2019 18:24:56 GMT
What would be the reason for the 278 being extended to Harrow? Which route would it take and would anything else need to be curtailed to prevent over-bussing and ensure best use of resources? The point of the 278 going to Ruislip is to connect people to Crossrail whilst people on the 140 route don't lose their connection to Hayes and Harlington. I'm sure there will be more traffic congestion in the area with Crossrail which will hamper the 140 hence why its being cut The poster said why does the 278 need to go to Harrow.
|
|
|
Post by kmkcheng on May 4, 2019 18:26:53 GMT
What would be the reason for the 278 being extended to Harrow? Which route would it take and would anything else need to be curtailed to prevent over-bussing and ensure best use of resources? To link North Harrow, Rayners Lane and Eastote with Hayes and Heathrow. To provide alternate link between Heathrow and Harrow. It could be go via Pembroke Road, North View, Eastern Avenue, Village Way, Village Way East, Imperial Drive, North Acton Station, Pinner Road and then via route 183 to Pinner. To make room at Harrow I would extend the H14 from Northwick Park Hospital to Westway Cross and extend the 395 to Northwick Park or merge the 395 and 223 together because Northolt and South Harrow could do with a link with Wembley. I assume you mean North Harrow station and you’re not going to Harrow if you follow the 183 to Pinner
|
|
|
Post by COBO on May 4, 2019 18:32:49 GMT
To link North Harrow, Rayners Lane and Eastote with Hayes and Heathrow. To provide alternate link between Heathrow and Harrow. It could be go via Pembroke Road, North View, Eastern Avenue, Village Way, Village Way East, Imperial Drive, North Acton Station, Pinner Road and then via route 183 to Pinner. To make room at Harrow I would extend the H14 from Northwick Park Hospital to Westway Cross and extend the 395 to Northwick Park or merge the 395 and 223 together because Northolt and South Harrow could do with a link with Wembley. I assume you mean North Harrow station and you’re not going to Harrow if you follow the 183 to Pinner Yes I mean North Harrow Station and I meant to say follow the 183 to Harrow.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 4, 2019 20:59:57 GMT
Maybe one route will use the U5's old stand whilst the 278 wouldn't fit in at Harrow due to limited space hence why the 223 is proposed to be cut back to allow the X140 to squeeze in. It seems they could easily solve this without breaking links by extending the 395 to Northwick Park Hospital bringing a much direct link from South Harrow who I'm sure would appreciate that sort of link but it boils down to money and cutting the 223 back is the cheaper option. I was thinking to make space at Harrow to maybe have the H14 extended from Northwick Park Hospital to Westway Cross, the 395 to Northwick Park and the 278 to Harrow. I wonder if the 223 and 395 could be merged together one route to solve the problem of limited stand space at Harrow. Northolt and South Harrow could do with a link to Wembley. Again, extending all those rotues cost money which TfL clearly doesn't want to spend currently.
|
|